assessment: Taking stock of people and ideas in the news.

Missouri College StudentsAre they really that miserable?

Illustration by Charlie Powell

If there were a Research Triangle for unhappiness, it would be a slim isosceles extending from two colleges in Columbia, Mo., to a third in Rolla, Mo., a roughly 90-mile stretch that must be Bizarro Disneyland for college students, their Unhappiest Place on Earth. At least, that's what the results from the Princeton Review's annual "best colleges" guidebooks suggest. For five of the past nine years, one of the three colleges—the University of Missouri-Columbia, Stephens College, and the University of Missouri-Rolla—has landed at No. 1 on the Princeton Review's list for the school with the "least happy students."

When this year's guidebook, the 2003 edition, hit bookstores last week, it was Rolla's turn to wear the crown of thorns. In 2001, Rolla's students were long-faced (No. 6 on the list); in 2002, they were glum (No. 2); but this year, they broke out into full-bore disconsolateness, garnering themselves the top spot for the first time in the school's history. It's a new accomplishment for Rolla, but for the state of Missouri it's old hat. Rolla's triumph, after a four-year stretch during which schools from New York and New Jersey topped the list, is similar to Oklahoma's most recent college football championship—Missouri has simply returned, after a brief hiatus, to its rightful place atop the collegiate misery index.

The glory days of the state's sadness streak began with the Princeton Review's 1995 guidebook. That edition gave the unhappiest-campus award to Stephens College, a small, mostly women's college in the mid-Missouri town of Columbia, which is also the home of the much larger University of Missouri-Columbia ("MU"). In 1996, Stephens grittily (and gloomily) defended its crown. But in 1997, MU students warded off an unprecedented "three-peat" by their cross-town rival, taking the Tearful Tiara for themselves. The next year, MU students matched Stephens' feat, winning back-to-back titles as the "least happy students" in the country. That capped a remarkable four-year stretch during which Columbia, Mo., cemented its reputation as a city filled with doleful college students on every street corner.

How does a school become No. 1 on the unhappy students list? At least once every three years, the Princeton Review sets up shop on the campus of each of the 300-plus schools in its guidebooks. The students who happen to see the Princeton Review's survey booth and decide to participate fill out a pencil-and-paper questionnaire that includes the question, "Overall, how happy are you?" The answers are given on a five-point scale, ranging from "Very happy" to "Not at all." (For the past two years, students have been allowed to fill out the surveys online as well.) The school that gets the lowest marks for that question is anointed the nation's least happy campus. It's a profoundly unscientific method of selecting participants, about as accurate as an online poll—which is to say, totally meaningless. Princeton Review senior editor Erik Olson calls the company's research "qualitative and anecdotal."

Still, taking the Princeton Review's results at face value, how did Missouri become our national State of Mourning? It's difficult to generalize: Happy campuses are all alike, but every unhappy campus is unhappy in its own way. Nonetheless, here are a few theories:

1. Missourians are an unusually honest bunch. Unlike their counterparts on the East Coast, Missourians may not inflate their self-assessments to make themselves look better. Incredibly thin reed of evidence on which to base this assertion: St. Louis' Washington University, which presumably has a more geographically diverse student body that's concerned with the school's national reputation, has yet to land on the somber-campus list. (Though it may be only a matter of time.)

2. It's not just college students. People have been fleeing Missouri in droves since the days of Manifest Destiny. The Santa Fe, California, and Oregon Trails all began in the Show-Me State. If all roads lead to Rome, they also all lead away from Missouri.

3. Centrists are inherently unhappy. Missouri gained statehood as part of a compromise between slave states and free states, and as a state it's maintained its compromising nature. Politically, it's a bellwether—one of the nation's most reliable swing states. It's a border state that's neither North nor South, and as a Midwestern state it's neither Rust Belt nor Great Plains. And no one likes a compromiser. Ask Henry Clay, or Bill Clinton. If you don't believe them, ask Revelation: "So, because you are lukewarm, neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth" (3:16). (One thing the residents haven't been able to compromise on is how to pronounce the state. As a general rule of thumb, people below I-70 say "Missourah" and people above I-70 say "Missouree." Perhaps everyone can agree to pronounce it "Misery"?)

No matter the reason, Missouri ought to leverage its newfound comparative advantage in unhappiness, perhaps using its melancholy monopoly as a way to gain market share in other emotions (bitterness? ennui?) favored by the collegiate in-crowd. But instead, students and administrators have tried to institute pro-happiness policies. Stephens College students signed their names on a giant poster ("surrounded by happy faces," according to the local morning paper), affirming their love for their alma mater. Students also wore T-shirts that boasted, "I Go to Stephens. I'm Very Happy." It's a Stuart Smalley approach to depression.

Here's a better idea: Give every incoming freshman a warm puppy.

Chris Suellentrop, a former Slate staffer, writes "The Opinionator" for the New York Times.
Illustration by Charlie Powell.
If you liked this Assessment column, check out Backstabbers, Crazed Geniuses, and Animals We Hate, a collection of our all-time funniest, meanest, sweetest, and weirdest profiles.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?

Notes From The Fray Editor:

Many posters just wanted us to get off Missouri's back. Many Iowans thought Missouri finally got what it deserved (this falls under "the narcissism of small differences," something we never indulged in in Ohio--Take that Kentucky!). A few wanted to back up the Princeton Review's judgment of UM Rolla and offered a kind of "culture of unhappiness" explanation. (Q: If there is a rough geographical distinction between those who say "MissourEE" and those who say "MissourAH," how does anyone pronounce "St. Louisian"?) Finally, if Misery needs company, there's always Nevada.

Remarks From The Fray:

My goodness, what do you Slate staffers have against Missouri? First you go after Lewis and Clark, then slam the state quarter design, and now the college students? Find another state to pick on!

--A St. Louisian

(To reply, click

As a graduate of UM Rolla and a near graduate of MU, I have a few comments to make. By far Rolla was a less pleasant experience than Columbia. There are many reasons for this.

First, It is an engineering school (roughly 90% of the students are studying engineering). This leads to dissatisfaction in a number of ways. First, unlike most universities, there are no "easy" majors. Every discipline is challenging and difficult. As a result as undergraduates we had to study hard or leave. I don't mean to denigrate other majors here. But from experience engineering is just harder than a lot of other subjects.

Second, being primarily dedicated to engineering the ration of men to women was 4 to 1 when I attended. Imagine attending school where you work hard all the time, and its unlikely you will even have a girlfriend because A) there aren't enough women to choose from and B) you are already a helpless unsocial geek.

-- Geoff

(To reply, click

While I can't speak to the misery of Mizzou or Stephens students, the reason for the unhappiness of Rolla students is clear. It's because no high school senior actually says, "I want to go to Rolla." They say "I have to go to Rolla."

UM-Rolla is a primarily engineering university, and is roughly 85% men. If one lives in the St. Louis area, it is the only decent and affordable state program in engineering. It's either Rolla, Mizzou, or Wash U, and who can afford Wash U?

So the men are unhappy because there are no women, and they do nothing but drink. And the women are unhappy because they get labeled as "Rolla Girls" and they're stuck with a bunch of drunken louts who feel the need to import chicks from Columbia. No wonder these people are miserable.

I could have gone to Rolla for free, but I chose to pay out-of-state tuition and head for Purdue, because Rolla Girl is a label that is impossible to shed. 10 years later I still feel it was a wise decision.

-- TS

(To reply, click